Hume’s strengths lie in the fact that on a simple level his analysis of free will seem to be logical. When presented with two options the choice to pick either seems to logically explain free will. Additionally his explanation and contrastment of compatibilism with determinism and how they function within each other, offers a compelling argument which leads to an understanding as to the nature of free will. Hume utilizes the use of examples illustrating causation and habit. Although seemingly faultless on the simplest level, Hume’s philosophical idea surrounding compatibilism appear to be a weak attempt of free will. Just because I technically have the choice to choose differently that doesn’t mean that I necessarily have free will. For example entertain the scenario of an addiction. In such a situation I technically have the ability to choose against the push of the addiction, but some people may not have the strength and will to fight it, resulting in a lack of free will. Additionally take the instance of someone who has a gun pointed at his head and is told to push someone off a cliff or he’ll be shot. Technically he has free will but in reality it is being stripped away from him and constrained through psychological means. Therefore Hume’s major flaw is his inability to address the problem of physical or psychological limitation. On a purely scientific molecular level make up of human beings, d’Holbach’s theory of the non-existent of free will checks out. The brain is a complex and highly complicated makeup of tissue, nerves, etc. Therefore it is possible to understand that perhaps we create an illusion for ourselves that we have free will, but are really just material objects in motion. For example the nature of genes is something the body just does and is not in our control, d’Holbach would contrast that to our everyday lives. According to this logic his theory would technically make sense. D’Holbach’s weaknesses lie in the fact that if this is true than human beings are not morally responsible for their actions. Since they are not following a will of their own than they are not to be praised or blamed for any particular instance. This shatters the idea of a functional society, and as no one is held accountable for their actions, and would cause complete devastation. This view also invites people to act immorally and justify their actions through saying they have no free will. It also denies that as individuals we have any purpose in this world and provides zero motivation to shape the world into a better place and to promote a better future. This is because according to determinism everything we accomplish is not an accomplishment of our own will.